Non Truther ties Saudi and Pakistani officials to 9-11

[Malum Prohibitum]

Apparently, some independently verified work by former Cravath associate attorney and now journalist Gerald Posner reveals that the destroyed tapes that congress is squawking about are actually of a big dog in Al Qaeda who at one point admited that Saudi Princes and high level Pakistani officials were in on 9/11. Of course, since the tape was destroyed we arent likely to ever know what was on it. Its convenient.

Then maybe we could verify this story through the people he named, right?

Of course also conveniently, everyone he named died in accidents or of heart attacks shortly thereafter.

This. is. huge.

read it for yourself. Im still stunned.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gerald-posner/the-cias-destroyed-inter_b_75850.html

P.S. Despite this being on the Huffington post site, this columnist is no conspiracy theorist... and it seems that his material is solid.

[InRonWeTrust]

Take this tinfoil crap somewhere else. It gives Ron a bad name to have this shit posted here.

Notice there is exactly ZERO evidence for any of the claims in the story. That's because it was "on the tapes that were destroyed." Sure, and some bigfoot footage was also on those tapes.

http://johnxlewis.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/tin_foil_hat.jpg

[ChickenHawk]

I wish "truthers" would just say they want a better investigation because there are too many unanswered questions instead of pushing wild speculation based on their own prejudices. They are just making themselves look nutty and reducing the possibilty that the truth will ever be known.

[Pharoah]

Intolerance isn't what Ron Paul is about... the anti-truthers should try to be civil when demonstrating their closed minds.

[PatriotOne]

Malum. I posted that article to in the hot topic section. It must be hitting a nerve for some members as they have once again been reduced to childish name calling.

[InRonWeTrust]

I love how the people who actually ask for valid evidence are "anti-Truth." Lol.

I'm going to start a Bigfoot Truth movement, and if you don't accept my flimsy evidence, then you are an "anti-Bigfoot-Truther."

[Malum Prohibitum]

LOL, this is funny, as Im not even a truther... I think alex jones and crowd are irresponsible at best. This article was written by a serious journalist, and former associate for one of the top law firms in the nation.

It amazes me that the same guys who complain about RP not getting any press refuse to discuss ideas other than the official state story.

Did you ostriches even bother reading the article or even my post? Or did you see 9-11 and immediately kneejerk?

[ChickenHawk]

LOL, this is funny, as Im not even a truther... I think alex jones and crowd are irresponsible at best. This article was written by a serious journalist, and former associate for one of the top law firms in the nation.

It amazes me that the same guys who complain about RP not getting any press refuse to discuss ideas other than the official state story.

Did you ostriches even bother reading the article or even my post? Or did you see 9-11 and immediately kneejerk?

I read it. How do I know any of the events described in the story are related? How do I know that the interrogation he talks about even happened? Who is his source? Maybe I need to read his book.

[InRonWeTrust]

I read the article and there is absolutely ZERO evidence for his main claim (which coincidentally is in a book he is trying to sell and promote). His main claim is that these destroyed CIA tapes contain Footage of Zubaydah confessing that high placed Saudis and Pakistanis were "in on 911."

How much evidence does he have for that claim. Absolutely ZERO.

How much evidence does he have for his claim that Zubaydah suddenly became "happy" when he thought he was being turned over to the Saudis? That's sounds like 100% bullshit to me, and the author provides no evidence at all for it.

Again, this guy could claim that bigfoot was on the destroyed tapes.

[Malum Prohibitum]

I read it. How do I know any of the events described in the story are related? How do I know that the interrogation he talks about even happened? Who is his source? Maybe I need to read his book.

Maybe you should, since he is citing his book, Im sure you will find that information there. I will be very suprised and eat my words if a former Cravath associate and Hastings Law grad doesnt cite correctly, and if he didnt, then he is lying on purpose. I for one, dont see any reason for him to have done so.

Now of course the testimony itself could be lies, and we have no way of verifying it, since all potential corroborators are dead, and of course evidence has been DESTROYED.

None of us is ever going to know exactly what happened or who knew what when, and to make wild accusations is bad for the cause of liberty in general. But to ignore real, responsible, investigative journalism is just crazy, and makes us no better than the MSM.

[PatriotOne]

I love how the people who actually ask for valid evidence are "anti-Truth." Lol.

I'm going to start a Bigfoot Truth movement, and if you don't accept my flimsy evidence, then you are an "anti-Bigfoot-Truther."

Namecalling and insults are for children or for those who have no other intellectual way to express themselves. I wouldn't expect someone with your limitations to understand the complexities of what really happened on 9/11.

[Malum Prohibitum]

I read the article and there is absolutely ZERO evidence for his main claim (which coincidentally is in a book he is trying to sell and promote). His main claim is that these destroyed CIA tapes contain Footage of Zubaydah confessing that high placed Saudis and Pakistanis were "in on 911."

How much evidence does he have for that claim. Absolutely ZERO.

How much evidence does he have for his claim that Zubaydah suddenly became "happy" when he thought he was being turned over to the Saudis? That's sounds like 100% bullshit to me, and the author provides no evidence at all for it.

Again, this guy could claim that bigfoot was on the destroyed tapes.

did you read the book? I dont remember him making the claim that THAT confession was on the tape. I think he was making the observation that its 'extra special coincidental' that of the two tapes that were destroyed, one of them was of the guy who reportedly made the claims about the Saudis and Pakistanis.

Im guessing the evidence is in the book, but I know how this guy has been trained, and I know the level of responsibility that is required in the level of work he has done, and Im telling you, if he prints something, its either backed up with an interview or a solid citation, or hes lying out his ass. He is referring to the book, the cites are 99% likely to be there, if you care to check. Im guessing you wont.

Just cause someone claims bigfoot, doesnt make them necessarily wrong.